Women scuffle with a soldier during a protest near the National Congress in Tegucigalpa January 25, 2013. (Jorge Cabrera/Reuters)

Last month, the Honduran Congress approved the creation of independent commercial cities called Employment and Economic Development zones (or "ZEDE" for
their Spanish acronym). Supporters of the ZEDEs, including Honduran President Porfirio Lobo Sosa, hope they will offer an alternative to the
corruption and governance challenges that hamstring Honduras's economy. They believe that replacing parts of Honduras's ineffective regulations with new
rules and institutions overseen by international experts will stimulate much-needed competition, economic growth, and foreign investment.

Striving to create sort of a Hong Kong on the Caribbean is controversial, however, and
detractors fear that the ZEDEs will fail, undermine the country's already weak institutions, and also hurt the land rights of marginalized indigenous
groups.

Honduras is one of the poorest and most insecure countries in Latin America: an estimated 60 percent of the population lives below the poverty line, and it has the
highest per-capita homicide rate in the world, according to the UN. Income
inequality, broken institutions and corruption are the norm. Honduras also suffers from political instability and a culture of impunity, which were
reinforced by a recent military coup. Past reform efforts have failed in large part because of opposition from a small group of entrenched elite families that control key
state institutions and entire sectors of the economy.

Against this backdrop, the government has sought out new approaches to tackling Honduras' problems. It started to explore the concept of charter cities in 2009 after
the president's chief of staff viewed a TED talk by the famous economist Paul Romer on the subject.

According to Romer, autonomous
economic zones attract investment, create jobs, and promote economic activity. They do so by adopting separate, investor-friendly regulatory environments
governed by other countries with proven track records (e.g. the U.K.
or Canada) instead of the often-corrupt local institutions. A zone's adoption of another country's regulatory regime provides the stability,
predictability, and transparency that businesses seek out. It also allows the host nation to experiment with new (and hopefully superior) regulatory
regimes before deploying them throughout its territory.

Romer rejects the notion that such zones are neocolonial because they do not rely upon two key underpinnings of colonialism -- coercion and condescension.
Local leaders remain sovereign. They elect to invite another country to assist with the administration of the zone, specify the scope of authority ceded to
the other country, and determine how that country is to be compensated. Romer cites Mauritius's decision to use the Privy Council -- the U.K.'s highest
court -- as the court of final appeal in Mauritius as a successful example of outsourcing certain administrative procedures to other countries. The
arrangement promotes investment in Mauritius by giving investors confidence that any disputes related to their investments will be resolved fairly by the
experienced and neutral Privy Council as opposed to less-respected local courts.

The Lobo Administration seized upon this concept as a potential answer to Honduras' economic and political woes, and it has worked over the past three
years to build such zones on Honduran territory. In early 2011, the Congress passed a law
allowing for the creation of ZEDEs, which was subsequently struck down as unconstitutional
by the Supreme Court.

A new law was drafted to address the concerns of the Supreme Court and included a series of constitutional amendments to allow for the creation of such
zones and the grant of autonomous judicial power to them. That law was approved on June 12 and Honduras is now moving forward with the establishment of the
first of 12 planned ZEDEs. Local residents are scheduled to vote on
them in November 2013.

According to Shanker Singham, an international trade and competition expert advising interested parties on this
initiative, the ZEDEs are inspired by Romer's ideas but add significantly to them. Honduras is focused on how an autonomous regulatory regime can unleash
the forces of competition and generate substantial wealth creation.

The structure of the ZEDEs ensures that Honduras itself--not only outside investors--derives maximum benefit from them. As investors and businesses begin to
locate their activities in a ZEDE, its land becomes more valuable (just as it did in Singapore, as that small nation became a hub of economic activity),
which generates wealth for landowners, including the local government, investors, and so on. Similarly, the economic activity within the ZEDE generates
profits in the form of taxes, concession fees, and equity stakes in new ventures. The government receives a sizeable share of this money. Honduras would
also benefit from the new jobs created in and around the zone through existing international businesses that relocate there and from new businesses that
form there. Economic growth is possible because the vested interests that traditionally benefit from lack of competition (and oppose reform efforts) do not
exist in these as-of-yet undeveloped areas. After all, no powerful family would have had any reason to use its money and influence to obtain, for example,
a monopoly in a barren part of the country devoid of commercial activity.

Under this vision, each ZEDE would be governed by a board that would have authority to establish the zone's regulatory system (which is independent from
Honduras' existing laws). The Board would be comprised of elements of the host government and investors, as opposed to an outside government. The board
delegates the day-to-day management of the zone to the administrator -- an outside technocrat -- who is given authority to oversee an investor-friendly
environment. The administrator also works with a developer on the physical development of the zone's land (a goal of the ZEDEs is to promote construction
on previously unused land). The recent constitutional amendments help ensure the regulatory autonomy of the zone and the government's commitment not to
intervene in its affairs.

The broad contours of the concept have historical precedent. There are several well-known examples of successful zones, including the City of London, Hong
Kong, Dubai, and the Bahamas. In the City of London, there is a
board comprised of aldermen and the Lord Mayor; the aldermen are chosen via direct election by both individuals and businesses that operate in the City,
and the City has long had rights and privileges that distinguished it from the rest of England, such as the ability to regulate its banks independently and
keep its markets open seven days a week, instead of the much more limited hours of other markets in the country.

In Hong Kong, which followed a different path to "one-country, two-systems," there is a legislative council whose members are chosen by a small group of HK citizens who
are themselves elected to represent various professional and other organizations. In the Bahamas, a private entity (the Grand Bahamas Port Authority) acts as both
developer and regulator under an agreement with the Government of the Bahamas. There are a host of special economic zones in China and elsewhere that are
also designed to stimulate investment and business growth. For these reasons, several countries are currently working to establish ZEDE-like areas,
including Morocco and Georgia.

Not everyone in Honduras supports the creation of ZEDEs, however. Some lawyers, activists, and other opponents
stress that ZEDEs are an affront to Honduran sovereignty. They even argue that the creation of separate judicial systems jeopardizes rights enshrined on the
Honduran Constitution. Indeed, weak institutions may enable the ZEDEs to be captured by corporate interests that take advantage of Honduras instead of
growing its economy. They also fear that the limited land rights of indigenous Garifuna groups will be further threatened.

Even if these criticisms prove to have merit, ZEDEs may be a smart move for Honduras. It may very well be easier to solve the country's systemic governance
challenges -- which drive its poor economic outlook and dire public security situation -- by starting afresh, even within small parts of its territory.

The new regulatory systems in the ZEDEs could set an example for the rest of the country to emulate. Starting with ZEDEs in small, undeveloped parts of
Honduras allows for the fine-tuning of their rules (which are new to the country) and avoids confronting entrenched interests (i.e. the handful of families
with a stranglehold on Honduras's economy) that blocked previous reform efforts. That way, the success of the ZEDEs could be proved before potentially
expanding them to larger swaths of Honduran territory.

Only time will tell if ZEDEs help Honduras tackle the myriad challenges facing its weak state or further undermine its tenuous stability. Creating a new
Hong Kong or Dubai on the Caribbean may be difficult, but even incremental success could catalyze much-needed economic growth and improvements to the rule
of law in Honduras, not to mention set an example for other developing countries to follow.

Most Popular

His paranoid style paved the road for Trumpism. Now he fears what’s been unleashed.

Glenn Beck looks like the dad in a Disney movie. He’s earnest, geeky, pink, and slightly bulbous. His idea of salty language is bullcrap.

The atmosphere at Beck’s Mercury Studios, outside Dallas, is similarly soothing, provided you ignore the references to genocide and civilizational collapse. In October, when most commentators considered a Donald Trump presidency a remote possibility, I followed audience members onto the set of The Glenn Beck Program, which airs on Beck’s website, theblaze.com. On the way, we passed through a life-size replica of the Oval Office as it might look if inhabited by a President Beck, complete with a portrait of Ronald Reagan and a large Norman Rockwell print of a Boy Scout.

Should you drink more coffee? Should you take melatonin? Can you train yourself to need less sleep? A physician’s guide to sleep in a stressful age.

During residency, Iworked hospital shifts that could last 36 hours, without sleep, often without breaks of more than a few minutes. Even writing this now, it sounds to me like I’m bragging or laying claim to some fortitude of character. I can’t think of another type of self-injury that might be similarly lauded, except maybe binge drinking. Technically the shifts were 30 hours, the mandatory limit imposed by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, but we stayed longer because people kept getting sick. Being a doctor is supposed to be about putting other people’s needs before your own. Our job was to power through.

The shifts usually felt shorter than they were, because they were so hectic. There was always a new patient in the emergency room who needed to be admitted, or a staff member on the eighth floor (which was full of late-stage terminally ill people) who needed me to fill out a death certificate. Sleep deprivation manifested as bouts of anger and despair mixed in with some euphoria, along with other sensations I’ve not had before or since. I remember once sitting with the family of a patient in critical condition, discussing an advance directive—the terms defining what the patient would want done were his heart to stop, which seemed likely to happen at any minute. Would he want to have chest compressions, electrical shocks, a breathing tube? In the middle of this, I had to look straight down at the chart in my lap, because I was laughing. This was the least funny scenario possible. I was experiencing a physical reaction unrelated to anything I knew to be happening in my mind. There is a type of seizure, called a gelastic seizure, during which the seizing person appears to be laughing—but I don’t think that was it. I think it was plain old delirium. It was mortifying, though no one seemed to notice.

Why did Trump’s choice for national-security advisor perform so well in the war on terror, only to find himself forced out of the Defense Intelligence Agency?

How does a man like retired Lieutenant General Mike Flynn—who spent his life sifting through information and parsing reports, separating rumor and innuendo from actionable intelligence—come to promote conspiracy theories on social media?

Perhaps it’s less Flynn who’s changed than that the circumstances in which he finds himself—thriving in some roles, and flailing in others.

In diagnostic testing, there’s a basic distinction between sensitivity, or the ability to identify positive results, and specificity, the ability to exclude negative ones. A test with high specificity may avoid generating false positives, but at the price of missing many diagnoses. One with high sensitivity may catch those tricky diagnoses, but also generate false positives along the way. Some people seem to sift through information with high sensitivity, but low specificity—spotting connections that others can’t, and perhaps some that aren’t even there.

“Well, you’re just special. You’re American,” remarked my colleague, smirking from across the coffee table. My other Finnish coworkers, from the school in Helsinki where I teach, nodded in agreement. They had just finished critiquing one of my habits, and they could see that I was on the defensive.

I threw my hands up and snapped, “You’re accusing me of being too friendly? Is that really such a bad thing?”

“Well, when I greet a colleague, I keep track,” she retorted, “so I don’t greet them again during the day!” Another chimed in, “That’s the same for me, too!”

Unbelievable, I thought. According to them, I’m too generous with my hellos.

When I told them I would do my best to greet them just once every day, they told me not to change my ways. They said they understood me. But the thing is, now that I’ve viewed myself from their perspective, I’m not sure I want to remain the same. Change isn’t a bad thing. And since moving to Finland two years ago, I’ve kicked a few bad American habits.

Why the ingrained expectation that women should desire to become parents is unhealthy

In 2008, Nebraska decriminalized child abandonment. The move was part of a "safe haven" law designed to address increased rates of infanticide in the state. Like other safe-haven laws, parents in Nebraska who felt unprepared to care for their babies could drop them off in a designated location without fear of arrest and prosecution. But legislators made a major logistical error: They failed to implement an age limitation for dropped-off children.

Within just weeks of the law passing, parents started dropping off their kids. But here's the rub: None of them were infants. A couple of months in, 36 children had been left in state hospitals and police stations. Twenty-two of the children were over 13 years old. A 51-year-old grandmother dropped off a 12-year-old boy. One father dropped off his entire family -- nine children from ages one to 17. Others drove from neighboring states to drop off their children once they heard that they could abandon them without repercussion.

Democrats who have struggled for years to sell the public on the Affordable Care Act are now confronting a far more urgent task: mobilizing a political coalition to save it.

Even as the party reels from last month’s election defeat, members of Congress, operatives, and liberal allies have turned to plotting a campaign against repealing the law that, they hope, will rival the Tea Party uprising of 2009 that nearly scuttled its passage in the first place. A group of progressive advocacy groups will announce on Friday a coordinated effort to protect the beneficiaries of the Affordable Care Act and stop Republicans from repealing the law without first identifying a plan to replace it.

They don’t have much time to fight back. Republicans on Capitol Hill plan to set repeal of Obamacare in motion as soon as the new Congress opens in January, and both the House and Senate could vote to wind down the law immediately after President-elect Donald Trump takes the oath of office on the 20th.

Trinidad has the highest rate of Islamic State recruitment in the Western hemisphere. How did this happen?

This summer, the so-called Islamic State published issue 15 of its online magazine Dabiq. In what has become a standard feature, it ran an interview with an ISIS foreign fighter. “When I was around twenty years old I would come to accept the religion of truth, Islam,” said Abu Sa’d at-Trinidadi, recalling how he had turned away from the Christian faith he was born into.

At-Trinidadi, as his nom de guerre suggests, is from the Caribbean island of Trinidad and Tobago (T&T), a country more readily associated with calypso and carnival than the “caliphate.” Asked if he had a message for “the Muslims of Trinidad,” he condemned his co-religionists at home for remaining in “a place where you have no honor and are forced to live in humiliation, subjugated by the disbelievers.” More chillingly, he urged Muslims in T&T to wage jihad against their fellow citizens: “Terrify the disbelievers in their own homes and make their streets run with their blood.”

A professor of cognitive science argues that the world is nothing like the one we experience through our senses.

As we go about our daily lives, we tend to assume that our perceptions—sights, sounds, textures, tastes—are an accurate portrayal of the real world. Sure, when we stop and think about it—or when we find ourselves fooled by a perceptual illusion—we realize with a jolt that what we perceive is never the world directly, but rather our brain’s best guess at what that world is like, a kind of internal simulation of an external reality. Still, we bank on the fact that our simulation is a reasonably decent one. If it wasn’t, wouldn’t evolution have weeded us out by now? The true reality might be forever beyond our reach, but surely our senses give us at least an inkling of what it’s really like.

The same part of the brain that allows us to step into the shoes of others also helps us restrain ourselves.

You’ve likely seen the video before: a stream of kids, confronted with a single, alluring marshmallow. If they can resist eating it for 15 minutes, they’ll get two. Some do. Others cave almost immediately.

This “Marshmallow Test,” first conducted in the 1960s, perfectly illustrates the ongoing war between impulsivity and self-control. The kids have to tamp down their immediate desires and focus on long-term goals—an ability that correlates with their later health, wealth, and academic success, and that is supposedly controlled by the front part of the brain. But a new study by Alexander Soutschek at the University of Zurich suggests that self-control is also influenced by another brain region—and one that casts this ability in a different light.

The combination of suspicion and reverence that people feel toward the financially successful isn’t unique to the modern era, but reflects a deep ambivalence that goes back to the Roman empire.

In the early 20th century, Dale Carnegie began to travel the United States delivering to audiences a potent message he would refine and eventually publish in his 1936 bestseller, How To Win Friends and Influence People: “About 15 percent of one’s financial success is due to one’s technical knowledge and about 85 percent is due to skill in human engineering—to personality and the ability to lead people.” Carnegie, who based his claim on research done at institutes founded by the industrialist Andrew Carnegie (unrelated), thus enshrined for Americans the notion that leadership was the key to success in business—that profit might be less about engineering things and more about engineering people. Over 30 million copies of Carnegie’s book have been sold since its publication.